[ad_1]
A high-ranking member of Trump charged with enforcing the laws against financial discrimination, once interviewed in pseudonym-written blog posts if the word was used was inherently racist and claimed that the vast majority of hate crimes were hoaxes.
Eric Blankenstein, director of policy at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, expressed these controversial views more than a decade ago on a political blog that he co-authored with two other anonymous contributors.
In an article published in 2004, Blankenstein wrote that a proposal at the University of Virginia to impose harsher academic sanctions for acts of intolerance was "racial idiocy."
"Well … let's say they called him n —–", he wrote, explaining the blur … "would that make them racist, or just one – —–?
Blankenstein also wrote that "hate crime hoaxes are about three times more common than real hate crimes."
The details of Blankenstein's blog have not been previously reported. He wrote under the name of "egb3r", an alias built from his initials. The Washington Post verified that the author is Blankenstein by reviewing the biographical details of the blog, including his age, his degree from the University of Virginia, the date of his marriage and a reference to his father, a lawyer .
In 2004, Eric Blankenstein wrote that "hate crime hoaxes are about three times more common than hate crimes". At the CFPB, he is responsible for enforcing laws against financial discrimination. (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) In a statement, Blankenstein acknowledged that he had written the articles, but that they had no influence on his work today. "Reading fragments of 14-year-old blogs that have nothing to do with the law on consumer protection helps to better understand my work," he said.
"Any attempt to do so is a naked exercise of bad faith and represents another nail in the coffin of civil discourse and the ability to reasonably disagree on issues of law and politics," he said. "The need to unearth statements I have written as a 25-year-old shows that, in the eyes of my critics, I am not guilty of a legal offense or neglect of my homework. but rather of conservative management. "
Blankenstein, 39, is one of many Trump appointees to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency created by President Barack Obama in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. He is one of the highest-paid government employees, winner $ 259,500, according to the archives.
It supervises lenders and enforces a series of consumer protection laws, including the four-decade-old Equal Opportunities Act, which aims to protect blacks and other minorities from discriminatory practices and to promote a fair loan.
Previously, Blankenstein worked as a private sector lawyer and represented banks involved in regulatory investigations launched by the agency that he now helps. Since joining the agency in December, he has helped deliver a campaign promise from President Trump reduce the role of the office as a watchdog of the the nation financial services sector.
In February, Mick Mulvaney, acting director of the office, decided to strip the Office of Equitable Loans and Equal Opportunities from the enforcement powers, reversing years of aggressive repression that resulted in dozens of cases.
In an interview, Makada Henry-Nickie, a former financial analyst at the office's lending office, asked how one could count on someone who wrote blog articles to conduct complex discrimination cases.
"It's chilling me to hear that kind of thinking," said Henry-Nickie, who left the office in August 2017 and is now a member of the Brookings Institution.
Patrice Ficklin, a career civil servant who is deputy director of the Fair Lending Office, said in a statement provided by the agency that she disagreed with Blankenstein on some issues of justice and enforcement, but described it as "
"Eric repeatedly said that he was determined to enforce fair loan laws," she said. "Under his tenure, he has allowed us to continue to advance our law enforcement and supervision work on fair lending and has also approved new issues."
Allied Progress, a non-profit organization that advocates for strict enforcement of consumer laws and follows the office closely, called for the removal of Blankenstein after reviewing the blog posts.
"With such odious views, Eric Blankenstein should not let himself be approached by the CFPB's Fair Loans Office, let alone run it," said Karl Frisch, executive director of the leftist party. watch dog group.
Blankenstein and a friend launched Two Guys Chatting in July 2004, shortly after graduating from Blankenstein at the University of Virginia. They have designed it as a forum for hot issues.
"WARNING: This website is not meant for the faint of heart," warned egb3r in a first post. "Politically correct things go on at their own risk. We are blunt We will call stupid stupidity. We will call ignorant ignorance. We will praise when it is earned and criticism when it is due. But what can be scariest for some is that we will be honest.
In a post, Blankenstein described abortion as "the destruction of life sponsored by the state".
"So, basically, you say that if a woman makes a mistake and that someone should not have her, she can get rid of the abortion problem without the father's consent, but the Who makes the same mistake does not have such a right?
Blankenstein posted a long message on September 30, 2004, after someone wrote the word on the hood of a black student car at the University of Virginia. The episode caused an uproar on campus and sparked a move to make racial intolerance a violation of the code of honor and grounds for deportation.
"So, there is more racial idiocy at UVa," wrote egb3r.
"So, what's your problem with that? In fact, I think it is wise to make this form of intolerance a violation of honor, "wrote the co-author of the blog DCD AEPi, who declined to comment when it reached publication .
"Because, as in the case of hate crime laws, they make it illegal to think," wrote egb3r.
He added: "Until a hood bearing the KKK member is taken, why should the system of honor be changed?"
In all, this note has been enriched by 3,000 words. Blankenstein has repeatedly questioned the need for a special application of race-related crime. "Should not we be more worried about the fact that the crime took place during the period?" "Does it matter if someone was beaten because it was black, or does it matter if someone gets beaten up?"
Blankenstein's debate partner, who called himself black on the blog, rejected his views on the race.
"I have no reason to believe that racist actions are not taking place at the AVU. . . I have never been a victim, but who am I to say that it does not happen?
Blankenstein replied, "There is a ——- wherever you go. . . but should be a ——- be illegal? "
Andrew Ba Tran, Alice Crites and Julie Tate contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link
